|
How are the Allies at Truk in the defensible terrain? Didn't they just come off the ships?
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 01:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 01:52 |
|
|
Because Grey attacked them. He should sit back and let them attack him. (The game doesn't differentiate between terrain types within a hex, so even though logically Grey charged down out of the hills and hit them on the beach, they get the terrain bonus as if they were already in the hills since they were on defense).
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 02:16
|
|
|
Truk fortress is a pain to fight through. I’ll fight to the last Australian for ‘murica
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 02:38
|
|
|
CannonFodder posted:How are the Allies at Truk in the defensible terrain? Didn't they just come off the ships? Because the game doesn't take that into account and its really dumb.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 02:43
|
|
|
Pershing posted:What should Grey be doing with these? Mostly shuffling leaders around so that the best leaders are in front-line commands. It would be a lot more concerning if it was the Allies, who always have more units to "buy-out" and be put into unrestricted commands, but Japan doesn't actually have that problem very much.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 03:50
|
|
|
pthighs posted:Because Grey attacked them. He should sit back and let them attack him. (The game doesn't differentiate between terrain types within a hex, so even though logically Grey charged down out of the hills and hit them on the beach, they get the terrain bonus as if they were already in the hills since they were on defense). 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 05:22
|
|
|
To be fair, Witp does have a mechanism to simulate the difficulties of amphibious landings: disruption. Without several months of prep for each land unit for the specific target landing hex they will be highly disrupted on landing and vulnerable to attacks. With that prep, and with appropriate supply, unloading speed, and support they immediately become dug in and formidable. E: coordinating all these moving parts months in advance and successfully carrying out a landing gives an enormous feeling of competence and is what makes this game special.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 05:38
|
|
|
pthighs posted:E: coordinating all these moving parts months in advance and successfully carrying out a landing gives an enormous feeling of competence and is what makes this game special.  it is super satisfying to pull off an amphibious op that you've been planning for days-weeks irl
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 05:45
|
|
|
pthighs posted:To be fair, Witp does have a mechanism to simulate the difficulties of amphibious landings: disruption. Without several months of prep for each land unit for the specific target landing hex they will be highly disrupted on landing and vulnerable to attacks. The attack on Wake Island seen a couple of pages ago doesn't even give the Allies a Terrain negative modifier. Really, if a WitP 2 ever comes out, I hope they rework a lot of the various combat bits and pieces, and the AI, because it could be such a bigger and better game.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 12:28
|
|
|
You can use preparation for defense too, right? That occasionally pops up as a negative modifier.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 13:06
|
|
|
Ograbme posted:You can use preparation for defense too, right? That occasionally pops up as a negative modifier. You should be able to, yes.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 13:13
|
|
|
Ograbme posted:You can use preparation for defense too, right? That occasionally pops up as a negative modifier. Preparation both reduces the disruption you take when you make amphibious landings, AND your general land combat performance as long as you're fighting within the hex that you're prepared for, so yeah, it still pays to use Preparation even for defenders, and even in non-water-related contexts. For example, there's a case to be made that if you can swing it, you as the Allied player can try to make a stand outside of Singapore, because all of the Japanese units will be prepping for Singapore after their landings on the Malay Peninsula.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 13:14
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Preparation both reduces the disruption you take when you make amphibious landings, AND your general land combat performance as long as you're fighting within the hex that you're prepared for, so yeah, it still pays to use Preparation even for defenders, and even in non-water-related contexts. So basically anywhere you have an army unit on a single island on defensive you should set it to continuous preparation for defense if possible just in case you get attacked?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 14:24
|
|
|
wedgekree posted:So basically anywhere you have an army unit on a single island on defensive you should set it to continuous preparation for defense if possible just in case you get attacked? Yes.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 14:28
|
|
|
   So far today, a load of boring bomber runs then my planes get murdered.  Uh-oh, they might finally be going after the airfield.    Get out of my sea! Or at least deeper into it.   Another nice quiet day to calm the nerves.  We're not going to make 100 ships though.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 18:19
|
|
|
You could sink an entire flotilla, you never know
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2018 20:41
|
|
|
lenoon posted:Yeah only the first computer, the only operational allied jet fighter, radar, VT fuses, even hobarts funnies: the back room boffins were employed by the state to be big old brains doing nothing but thinking. yeah i was trying to hard to be glib, came off dismissive. sorry yall
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 00:50
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Because the game doesn't take that into account and its really dumb. I dunno. IRL this happened a few times. The Japanese came down out of their fortifications to push the Americans on the beach into the sea. Except that the attack becomes disjointed and dispersed because the flat terrain leading to the beach is a mangled wasteland of felled trees, craters and obstacles and under observation and vulnerable to naval gunfire and air attack. The US forces were so heavily armed by then that attacking into the face of their defenses was near suicide without heavy suppression.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 01:32
|
|
|
Murgos posted:I dunno. IRL this happened a few times. The Japanese came down out of their fortifications to push the Americans on the beach into the sea. Except that the attack becomes disjointed and dispersed because the flat terrain leading to the beach is a mangled wasteland of felled trees, craters and obstacles and under observation and vulnerable to naval gunfire and air attack. The US forces were so heavily armed by then that attacking into the face of their defenses was near suicide without heavy suppression. Yeah but again the game doesn't really take into account how wide a front the beachhead is, or how well the guns should be doing vs such a potentially small area. For some of the smaller islands/atolls, it should be bloody murder trying to get off the beachhead, and the AI so far has had quite a time dedicating actual warships to suppress anyone.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 02:04
|
|
|
29 May 1944 The only American carrier to be sunk in the Atlantic, the Bogue-class CVE Block Island is struck by three torpedoes fired by U-549 between the Azores and Canaries. Only six men were lost from a crew of over 900. In the ensuing hunt, the u-boat also managed to torpedo the DE Barr before being sunk. Barr survived and was repaired after being towed to Casablanca.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 02:31
|
|
|
OpenlyEvilJello posted:29 May 1944 Kaleun Krankenhagen probably yelled WITNESS ME as he committed to that attack because holy poo poo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_submarine_U-549#2nd_patrol_and_loss Kinda amazing that they still put AA guns on the IXs aphid_licker fucked around with this message at 11:21 on May 30, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 11:17
|
|
|
When the enemy has gotten to the point where they're sending carrier groups after individual submarines, that's when you know that you're not long for this world no matter what you do.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 16:09
|
|
|
  The Flak is heavy over Manus.  The raiders come under attack again.  The Thunderbolts punish our pilots.   The range of the Superforts is frightening.  Ahh, that's a better day for those of you needed sedatives to get through this LP. 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 18:12
|
|
|
The AI's choice of Superfortress target is interesting. I'd think Bangkok or Saigon would be much better targets than Hainan from a VP standpoint.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2018 21:11
|
|
|
   One of our tankers has a near miss.   There are Warhawks and Mosquitoes in Burma.  The Thunderbolts raid us again.  Down come a couple of Liberators!  Then it's more Thunderbolts!  The Allies are back at Wake.  They hit our troops, we hit their ships.  It's a shame they've just landed a base force again.  Just how many failed invasions of Wake will we see?  We have confirmed the Hornet II!
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 18:02
|
|
|
Grey Hunter posted:
What was the final count for this month?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 18:24
|
|
|
I like to think we have an elaborate sigint/psy-ops thing going where they think they have a fully functioning base on Wake and keep happily resupplying it.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 19:03
|
|
|
pthighs posted:I like to think we have an elaborate sigint/psy-ops thing going where they think they have a fully functioning base on Wake and keep happily resupplying it. I'm guessing this is what the AI is actually thinking.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2018 21:40
|
|
|
31 May 1944 Japan loses an escort, the Ishigaki, to USS Herring in the Kuriles. The German minesweeper M-13 is mined in the Gironde. May was a fairly ordinary month in terms of losses, but as we move into June the near-simultaneous invasions of Normandy and the Marianas will drive heavy fighting and heavy losses (about 60 total ships—though bear in mind this isn't directly comparable to Grey's numbers as I don't record merchant losses).
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 02:25
|
|
|
The continuing struggle between minesweepers and The Old Enemy made me realize I really have no idea how minesweeping works. Step one, I imagine, involves locating the mines. Which probably means using sonar. Then you... I don't know, throw rocks where you think the mines should be? Fire at them? Put up a buoy with a skull and crossbones sign?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 03:15
|
|
|
Deep Dish Fuckfest posted:The continuing struggle between minesweepers and The Old Enemy made me realize I really have no idea how minesweeping works. Step one, I imagine, involves locating the mines. Which probably means using sonar. Then you... I don't know, throw rocks where you think the mines should be? Fire at them? Put up a buoy with a skull and crossbones sign? Don't they have some sort of dredge behind them? I also have no idea how minesweeping works. Especially in WW1 pre-sonar.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 03:17
|
|
|
Depth charge them? I don't know either
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 03:18
|
|
|
You have an area where you know mines exist but you don't know exactly where. Then you stick booms on a boat too small to set off the mines. Then that boat goes in straight lines through the minefield and 'sweeps' up mines so they can be detonated. Now you have a known safe channel through the minefield.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 03:29
|
|
|
Deep Dish Fuckfest posted:The continuing struggle between minesweepers and The Old Enemy made me realize I really have no idea how minesweeping works. Step one, I imagine, involves locating the mines. Which probably means using sonar. Then you... I don't know, throw rocks where you think the mines should be? Fire at them? Put up a buoy with a skull and crossbones sign? Somebody made a really good series of posts about it in the MilHist thread a long time ago, but I can't find it now. The gist of it is you build a wooden boat (so it's not magnetic) and sail it around pulling around de-mining tools (different types for different mines) and clear channels for your other boats.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 03:33
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Deep Dish Fuckfest posted:The continuing struggle between minesweepers and The Old Enemy made me realize I really have no idea how minesweeping works. Step one, I imagine, involves locating the mines. Which probably means using sonar. Then you... I don't know, throw rocks where you think the mines should be? Fire at them? Put up a buoy with a skull and crossbones sign? Polyakov did a big effortpost series on mine warfare in the A/T milhist thread in here somewhere. I think he covers period sweeping techniques. Very brief version: shallow draft vessels float over the moored contact mines to avoid them, heavy-duty winching gear handles things like nets or paravanes (trawlers were frequently pressed into service because of this). It's risky and hard even before you get into alternate mine types, which is why so many minesweepers fall to their prey.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 03:33
|
|
|
I know that the British used to use wooden hull ships so as to counter the magnetic mines as minesweepers. As for detecting them, not too sure as when done well the mines are supposed to only sit beneath the surface of the sea making visual identification almost impossible.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 03:37
|
|
|
Deep Dish Fuckfest posted:The continuing struggle between minesweepers and The Old Enemy made me realize I really have no idea how minesweeping works. Step one, I imagine, involves locating the mines. Which probably means using sonar. Then you... I don't know, throw rocks where you think the mines should be? Fire at them? Put up a buoy with a skull and crossbones sign? Wooden, shallow hull with nets or other means of capturing the mines, then detonate them by shooting them. At least, that's how I've heard it done. Wiki states "A sweep is either a contact sweep, a wire dragged through the water by one or two ships to cut the mooring wire of floating mines, or a distance sweep that mimics a ship to detonate the mines. The sweeps are dragged by minesweepers, either purpose-built military ships or converted trawlers. Each run covers between 100 and 200 meters (330 and 660 ft), and the ships must move slowly in a straight line, making them vulnerable to enemy fire. This was exploited by the Turkish army in the Battle of Gallipoli in 1915, when mobile howitzer batteries prevented the British and French from clearing a way through minefields. If a contact sweep hits a mine, the wire of the sweep rubs against the mooring wire until it is cut. Sometimes "cutters", explosive devices to cut the mine's wire, are used to lessen the strain on the sweeping wire. Mines cut free are recorded and collected for research or shot with a deck gun.[2] Minesweepers protect themselves with an oropesa or paravane instead of a second minesweeper. These are torpedo-shaped towed bodies, similar in shape to a Harvey Torpedo, that are streamed from the sweeping vessel thus keeping the sweep at a determined depth and position. Some large warships were routinely equipped with paravane sweeps near the bows in case they inadvertently sailed into minefields—the mine would be deflected towards the paravane by the wire instead of towards the ship by its wake. More recently, heavy-lift helicopters have dragged minesweeping sleds, as in the 1991 Persian Gulf War.[3] The distance sweep mimics the sound and magnetism of a ship and is pulled behind the sweeper. It has floating coils and large underwater drums. It is the only sweep effective against bottom mines. During the Second World War, RAF Coastal Command used Vickers Wellington bombers Wellington DW.Mk I fitted with degaussing coils to trigger magnetic mines.[4] Modern influence mines are designed to discriminate against false inputs and are therefore much harder to sweep. They often contain inherent anti-sweeping mechanisms. For example, they may be programmed to respond to the unique noise of a particular ship-type, its associated magnetic signature and the typical pressure displacement of such a vessel. As a result, a mine-sweeper must accurately guess and mimic the required target signature in order to trigger detonation. The task is complicated by the fact that an influence mine may have one or more of a hundred different potential target signatures programmed into it.[5] Another anti-sweeping mechanism is a ship-counter in the mine fuze. When enabled, this allows detonation only after the mine fuze has been triggered a pre-set number of times. To further complicate matters, influence mines may be programmed to arm themselves (or disarm automatically—known as self-sterilization) after a pre-set time. During the pre-set arming delay (which could last days or even weeks) the mine would remain dormant and ignore any target stimulus, whether genuine or faked.[5] When influence mines are laid in an ocean minefield, they may have various combinations of fuze settings configured. For example, some mines (with the acoustic sensor enabled) may become active within three hours of being laid, others (with the acoustic and magnetic sensors enabled) may become active after two weeks but have the ship-counter mechanism set to ignore the first two trigger events, and still others in the same minefield (with the magnetic and pressure sensors enabled) may not become armed until three weeks have passed. Groups of mines within this mine-field may have different target signatures which may or may not overlap. The fuzes on influence mines allow many different permutations, which complicates the clearance process.[5] Mines with ship-counters, arming delays and highly specific target signatures in mine fuses can falsely convince a belligerent that a particular area is clear of mines or has been swept effectively because a succession of vessels have already passed through safely."
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 03:40
|
|
|
OpenlyEvilJello posted:Polyakov did a big effortpost series on mine warfare in the A/T milhist thread in here somewhere. I just spent half an hour looking for the relevant posts by Polikarpov, who is a different poster altogether. Oops. 1.) 1777 - 1844 2.) 1844 - 1907 3.) 1907 - 1918 4.) 1918 - 1945 5.) 1945 - 1975 6.) 1967 - 1991
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 04:07
|
|
|
dublish posted:I just spent half an hour looking for the relevant posts by Polikarpov, who is a different poster altogether. Oops. You, sir, are a gentleman and a reblogger. (thank you!)
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 04:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 01:52 |
|
|
So how many carrier kills did you get this month Grey? Nice job! Shame you couldn't get those BB's as well but best to err on the side of safety when you didn't have your own heavies in the area.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2018 04:13
|
|